A US firm is stating that either "Quit Smoking"...or don't work here.
Full Story here!
Printable View
A US firm is stating that either "Quit Smoking"...or don't work here.
Full Story here!
Quote:
Originally Posted by UcanRock2
:ohmy: Quit smoking, but while you are doing it.......don't gain an ounce. :D
That guy sounds like an annoying prick for whom I wouldn't work even if I was a non-smoker.
Imposing his will in the workplace may ( note the qualifier) be acceptable, but regulating his workers lives outside the office is beyond the pale.
He's an insurance salesman, which already relegates him to lower life-form status anyway.
Good on him, he's making his employees healthier, probably happier, and he'll no doubt see less time taken off sick.
Quite a set of assumptions.Quote:
Originally Posted by UKResident
No basis in fact (especially "probably happier"), but to each his own.
Would you really like to be employed by a man who felt that his supervision extended into your private life?
Not I.
He's got no right to dictate to his employees how they live their lives outside of office hours. What a wanker! :angry:Quote:
Originally Posted by UKResident
Whatever next - Everyone must be in bed by 10 pm...? :blink:
Really? So smoking isn't detrimental to your health? l must have been misinformed. And why "especially" anything? Either it's true or untrue, what does 'especially' untrue mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker
How smoking is for your health isn't the issue. Privacy and freedom are issues that come up for me. He'd better have brreathalizers at the job too. Please..you think they should regulate eating habits, alcohol, and tobacco? Those are the "legal" things, but you sure are screwed if you're caught smoking a fatty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker
Me. Neither.
There are a lot of lifestyle choices, and even chronic conditions that might effect health insurance claims. How can he discriminate?
I am afraid working for this man would lead me to drink and smoke. :P
Isn't the "greater good" justification for controlling human behavior the ideal of communism? (I don't want to argue the defintion of communism)
In a free society, one should strive to maintain the right to do as one pleases to achieve personal happiness, as long as in doing so you are not harming others.
If his argument is that they will be healthier and call in sick less often, then that gets a little shaky.
Hell, who would hire a diabetic, someone with heart disease, liver disease. But he can't ask those questions because that is private health information.
I think he should only be able to judge a person on what they bring to work.
We hire people based on what they say, so not why how they look? We don't let an idiot represent our product, so why should we hire a fat slob, who reeks of tobacco and alcohol?
If I run a healthfood chain, I would want all my employees to radiate health.
I think I should be able to stipulate that I want the workplace to be free of drinkers and smokers and that fat people don't sell "powerbars" very well.
If a person wants to drink outside of work, but always shows up to work on time and is completely alcohol free he should be allowed to do so.
SAme with smokers. If they have fresh clothes, clean teeth and nails, and report to work on time, they should be able to smoke as they please.
Employees should be based on performance, not habits. If I keep calling in sick, or I don't carry my fair load, then fire me for that.
The urine sample is a complete violation of personal privacy. He is an employer, not a doctor.
So the argument that he is doing it for them is a bit dangerous in my mind. If I want to be told how to live and sacrifice my desires for the good of society, I will move to China.
I do understand that both my intellect and appearance are important components of my job, but if I am not working directly with the public, as an embassador of the company, then being overweight really shouldn't be an issue.
Communist ideology. :dry:Quote:
Originally Posted by UKResident
Really? Do you have the freedom to be a communist in the US then?Quote:
Communist ideology
In the US, you do not have the freedom to impose your communist beliefs on others, as it infringes on their individual rights.Quote:
Originally Posted by UKResident
Now could we get back on topic.
Exactly. :dry:Quote:
Originally Posted by hobbes
An employee can govern an employee while on the job. Smoking is not an illegal substance therefore the fact an employee smokes outside of the job means no harm no foul.
I wonder if he refuses to do business with anyone who smokes.
i saw this on the tv news.
i find it interesting that it has been called communist thinking when it is in fact the employment laws for that state...a US state... that appear to allow such a company policy. the same company is not allowed to have testing in other states in which it has operations. I would be interested to hear of any communist country where such a thing has happened.
I have heard of US companies that have teetotal conditions written into contracts of employment although i can't without researching, point to them.
I disagree with his actions however.
well, seems all the extra money being poured into anti-smoking is taking effect. I am truly a minority when I go outside to have a smoke. I have seem similiar reports of people being told to quit smoking, or find other employment. Its not a state law here, but I guess up to the company.
Why do I feel like we are living the movie "The Demolition Man" when I see this? It does seem they will eventually make smoking illegal. whats next ? bodily fluid transfer ? salt ? :huh:
1st they took away our smoking room, and no one complained
Then they told us we could go outside, and no one complained
Then they told us to go round the side of the building (into the prevailing weather in our area).. no one complained
and theres hardly anyone left to complain except management... coz the staff are now always on the f'n sick with the flue
Do you drink?Quote:
Originally Posted by UKResident
Do you take Prescription Drugs?
Hell; do you eat? Theres a lot of food poisoning around, maybe you should stop that... You'd be healthier and happier and spend less time on the bog.
maybe thats why I am so damn sick now :( I forget I get hot and sweaty working on the machines all night, then have to go outside in 30-40 F temperatures.
I never complained about having to go outside, but I will say restaurants have lost some of my money, cause I no longer sit in there longer than it takes to finish my meal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
Vidcc,
I wasn't trying to bring up any "damn commie" type accusation, but rather point out that a boss controlling his workers outside the confines of their obligations to the business was depriving them of their freedom of choice.
Such an imposition, even for ideals of "better health and happier people", is a way of removing indivdual rights for the betterment of the company, as he sees it. This philosophy is more in line with communistic thinking than freedom of the individual.
I'm not sure from the article that if what he is doing is legal. He says it is, but he doesn't seem to be suffering from a shortage of opinions.
I think legal challenge has not been brought forth because, as Clocker alluded to, the guy is likely an ass and people don't want to work for him anyway.
REmember, everyone in bed by 10:00, it does a body good!
Hobbes
I didn't suggest you did bring up any "dam commie" type accusation, i just found it interesting that it was compared to communist thinking, even with your reasoning, and made the point that it was the USA employment laws that allowed it.
I am unaware if such an action would be allowed in any socialist country, which is closer to the left than the USA, let alone a communist one.
My point being that the employee in many socialist countries generally enjoys more rights and protections than most states in the USA. Here there is something of a "hands off" approach from government in private industry, so it is more likely to be an "American" thing.
So far there haven't been any lawsuits as has been pointed out. I do not know the employment laws in that state. It will be a very interesting case if one does go to court.
but as i said before i don't agree with the policy...it is wrong IMO...i'm just not sure if it is illegal
I think that if challenged legally, US employment laws will not allow it. All we know from the article is that Mr. Weyers thinks it is legal.Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
Do you think controlling your employees outside the workplace is more in line with communist idealogy or a belief in the freedom of the individual?
Obviously it is more in line with communism where people must do as they are told and have no personal rights or freedom.
That is my point. Mr' Weyers is using a philosophy I don't agree with.
Out of complete ignorance on my part, what rights do employees get in socialist countries that we don't get here?
Perhaps I worded that poorly.Quote:
Originally Posted by UKResident
I don't doubt that smoking is detrimental to one's health, I do however doubt that being forced to quit by a tin-horn martinet will make his minions "happier".
BTW, it's apparent that sky-diving and dabbling in deviant sexual behaviour can also be detrimental to a body's health, so I assume that you will gladly cede to the boss the right to restict those activities also.
But that would be the state controlling political frredoms, not the factory "chief" controlling personal livesQuote:
Originally Posted by hobbes
it was political and often religious freedoms they lacked...often western influences were prohibited i agree.. and they couldn't leave without permissionQuote:
Obviously it is more in line with communism where people must do as they are told and have no personal rights or freedom.
and i don't agree with it, however he MAY be legally able to do it. He certainly has the legal right in that state to have mandatory testing for booze/drugs etc....the question is if he can test for nicotine.Quote:
That is my point. Mr' Weyers is using a philosophy I don't agree with.
range from it being harder to dismiss an employee to maditory pension schemes, amount of paid holiday, overtime payments, Sickness pay compulsory job training, workers hours etc. each country being different but those within the EU coming closer together.Quote:
Out of complete ignorance on my part, what rights do employees get in socialist countries that we don't get here?
Much of which is a result of the EU directives. I can't say they are always good for the company or the employee.
Some things mentioned will be part of US employment laws but more in favor of the employee
I left manditory company healthcare payments into the social health system out because everyone gets healthcare...not just those working...however only those working would pay into it
Isn't the concept exactly the same.
A factory overlord is a microscosm of government control.
Maybe he thinks that Republican employees for the best team unity. Or Christian employees are bestowed with a sense of inner peace and will therefore call in sick less.
The point is not his particular case, but if he is allowed to do this, what implication does this mean for our society? What are the limits of the mandates we can impose upon people outside of working hours.
Can all Federal employees be held to the same rules?
So I was simply extrapolating this isolated incident to the national picture and testing the limits.
Since it compromises individual freedoms, I object.
As for the comments you made about socialist system, I came to the same thoughts as you provided whilst driving for some chicken. As you seem aware, and as anyone who has ever dealt with the VA Healthcare system, you understand that these are not necessarily good protections.
BTW, I think testing for marijuana is a violation of our personal rights. Testing for alcohol will only be positive, if one is drinking on the job.
I have known quite a few people that have smoked all their lives, seldom went to the Doctor and lived to a very old age. I guess there are exceptions to everything.
I agree with Hobbes; as long as it does not interfere with their performance while at work, an employee's life after work should be off limits to a boss's control.
I can forsee an employee that quits smoking. However, his spouse still smokes, and his health is affected by continual exposure. How will this employer control this situation? :)
Smoking is used by a lot of people as a means to deal with stress. Very often after giving up the habit, a smoker's blood pressure will rise considerably, unless another way to deal with stress is adopted. This may end up costing him more in health claims than he is prepared for.
The thought of working in an office with twelve people (this is the number of his employees who quit Jan. 1) who are being forced to give up smoking against their will seems dangerous, health wise, in itself. :D Imagine the possibilities and lawsuits if anyone goes 'postal.'
In using a little imagination here........if this type of thing continues I can forsee office workers being told not to use computers while off the job, as it causes too much eye strain and neck and back problems to do so both at home and while on the job. :D
It is not illegal to smoke. This employer has overstepped his boundaries.
By drinking l take it you mean alcohol? No l don't, l don't take drugs either and l certainly don't smoke. Only idiots smoke, whatever you may say. Why would anyone take up that digusting habit? l also eat well, l've been a vegetarian all my life and spend only the necessary time on the "bog", unless l'm reading the Guardian of course, then l may stay a little longer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rat Faced
And for your information, l'm 62 and l still run marathons, could you?
and?
Do you only eat organic veggies? No? Then you make as well grill up a steak, just as much poison in that squash.Quote:
Originally Posted by UKResident
And then in a couple months.................Quote:
The owner of a Michigan company who forced his employees to either quit smoking or quit their jobs said on Wednesday he also wants to tell fat workers to lose weight or else.
The owner of a Michigan company who forced his employees to either lose weight or quit their jobs said he also wants to tell black people to quit listening to rap or quit their job and to tell gay people to quit being gay or quit their jobs.
I see slippery slope and discrimination lawsuits. :huh:
I have no idea how large a company Weyco is, but I imagine it won't be in business much longer if he refuses to hire smokers and overweight people.
I'm neither, but I definately wouldn't work for such a company, and I certainly wouldn't be supporting them with any of my money.
:shuriken:
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by HeavyMetalParkingLot
l was replying to someone, is that all right by you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruthie
Hmmm. I'll have to think about it. ROFL. Thought it was self-explanatory, like THIS post. Was asking for your point.
The point of what? Of replying to someone? l thought that was self explanatory.Quote:
Originally Posted by ruthie
:reallol: :DQuote:
Originally Posted by UKResident
All this healthy living seems to be playing havoc with your sleeping pattern, you always seem to be around the board at this time. Posting at half three in the morning, that cannot be healthy. You think the bland diet and all the marathon running is turning you into an insomniac - or maybe Slough is in a different timezone to the rest of the UK.
OK, what if your employer regulated the times you went to bed so that you'd be as fresh as a daisy for work the next day. That would curtail your forum habits, certainly, but more importantly it would also be infringing on your civil liberties a tad. Would you be OK with that.
Well, I for one won't be employing any Guardian readers, too much free thinking would upset my totalitarian control of their lives, and I know exactly what's best for all concerned.Quote:
Originally Posted by UKResident
Why are you so overtly concerned with other people's lives? Worrying about what other people do seems to be an obsession with you, that can't be healthy can it?Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
So you can't refute that I have a point :happy:
If an employer is within his rights to stop people smoking outside of office hours, because it's beneficial to their health - surely it follows that your employer should be able to tell you to go to bed at a decent hour.
I propose that rather than your initial 'good on him' comment - you would actually be fuming at him daring to suggest that he has any sort of control over what you do when you clock off.
Hmmm...that would appear to be a trait that you exhibit also, Billy.Quote:
Originally Posted by UKResident
After all, you think it's OK for a boss to supervise his employee's private life, right?